Steven G. Cohen v. Grievance Administrator, Attorney Grievance Commission of Michigan

This case arises out of the estate of civil rights icon Rosa Parks. In 2011, after years of appellate proceedings, the Michigan Supreme Court issued an order reversing, inter alia, a string of decisions made by a corrupt probate court judge that had confiscated separate, non-probate property of the sole beneficiaries of the estate (Petitioner’s clients) and awarded it to courtappointed cronies who had no connection to Mrs. Parks. After reversal, Petitioner filed a damages action against the fiduciaries and a motion to disqualify the probate judge that contained allegations of judicial corruption wholly consistent with the successful appellate briefs. The action and motion were dismissed without any proceedings or trial. Three years later a formal professional ethics complaint was filed . . . against Petitioner. The complaint alleged that the action and motion were frivolous, discourteous, and prejudicial to the proper administration of justice. When the Petitioner attempted to defend against the ethics charges by demonstrating that these pleadings were factually accurate and legally meritorious, the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board barred Petitioner’s evidence and cited him for professional misconduct, bizarrely holding that, “The truth is not relevant” and “We don’t care what happened in the probate case.” The question presented for review is as follows: WHETHER THE ARBITRARY, CONTRADICTORY AND FACT-FREE PROCEEDINGS CONDUCTED BY THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY